I try to stay out of political debates when it's not face to face but do follow and am interested in politics. It's impossible on a forum to explain why any particular political view or stance is held as to do so would require a book the size of No Chance's Index for his Rule Books. That being said and on a neutral point as it applied to both sets of the main parties supporters did anyone watch the QT debate last night? The one thing that stood out for me was how rude and discourteous just about every audience member was when speaking or asking a question to the "other" side. Everyone seemed to think they were Jeremy Paxman (who I can't stand for the same reasons) and showed little respect to the party leader they were talking to. My mother always used to say "that manners maketh the man". Well there were no manners from just about most of those in the audience last night. I'm sure that if the party leader answering spoke to the audience person in the same tone and manner that the audience person had spoken to them then the audience person would have been crying on about the party leader showing them no respect. We all may have different political views but it does not excuse bad manners or lack of tolerance of that person's views if honestly held. People can try and persuade others but belittling the others views is never going to persuade anyone to change their views to your own. (not saying that that is what is happening on this thread but is just a general observation). It is also not to say you on a programme like last nights cannot challenge the party leaders policies but this can be done a la Robin Day style who was persistent but not down right rude like Paxman. Old man rant over.
I think you're bang on in how the public treat politicians - many seem to think they can be bloody rude to politicians in the certain knowledge that the politician has to smile and nod and suck it up. If they don't, they're castigated. Even if they're blowing off steam in a private conversation afterwards (and forgot to switch the microphone off, idiot). Interviewers, I'm a bit more ambivalent. You can be damn sure that if interviewers were polite then the politicians would abuse the conventional rules of politeness to give us even less of an answer than they already do. We also don't want to go down the US route of giving sycophantic coverage. I had a genuine moment of patriotic pride earlier this year when hearing a member of the Trump administration being grilled by Humphreys on the radio. The Trump spokesman was genuinely baffled to be faced with an interviewer that actually demanded answers to specific questions rather than giving him the space to regurgitate pre-prepared soundbites - and then called him on it when he didn't answer the question! It was bloody glorious. Long may that continue.
Maybe if politicians didn't lie so much, people wouldn't be so rude to them. Let's be clear ALL politicians lie to suit their own needs.
No doubt. But do you really think people would vote for an honest politician? I'm not a fan of the Tories at all, but on the few occasions they've tried to tell difficult truths in this election (that they're planning on ditching the pensions triple lock, cutting benefits for 3rd children, explaining that care actually costs a lot of money) they've been absolutely castigated for it. If they'd shut up about it, won the election and enacted those policies anyway it would all be forgotten about by 2022. If lying is genuinely a better strategy for getting elected, that's the publics fault, not the politicians.
Politicians may lie but, for me, still no excuse for rudeness and bad manners. What does the person being rude expect to achieve by being rude? Can't understand it I mean even that fat slob Obi isn't rude all the time.
they are ****s. All of them. Roll on 8th June. We can all get on with the important things in life then.
I don't believe in being polite to politicians just because they are politicians. However, we could all do with a good dose of manners when it comes to political issues these days. Politicians, campaigners and voters all deserve more respect for beliefs that are genuinely held. All sides fall short when it comes to this. We are going down the American route of becoming polarised and people on all sides slinging insults at people they disagree with. You just have to delve into the murky underworld of social media comments to see that in action. I think social media is part of the problem - or at least the way we use it is. People are surrounding themselves with voices and opinions they agree with and hearing the other point of view less and less.
Too late Nev, we've already gone the American route. These so called debates on TV aren't debates, they're just an opportunity to slag each other off, or more so, gang up and bully one or two of the other participants. As for the audiences, least said the better. Personally, I couldn't care less who people vote for, it's their choice, same as it was my choice to vote UKIP.
You're probably right. We're all the losers though. In practice very few of us will fit perfectly into voting for one party or another, and we're missing out on proper debates to find out which one best suits our own preferences and opinions. More to the point, many people are missing out on the opportunity to be persuaded to change their mind with an informed debate. I know that doesn't apply to everyone and that some people are basing their vote on informed decisions, but too few people are taking the time to really investigate what each party/candidate stands for.
Sadly, I think you are right. It is now very much like an American Presidential race and the debates are not debates but just a forum to spout each party's "sound bites" without adding any substance. Again, unfortunately, too many people seem willing to just listen and decide based on the "sound bites" and in a discussion (which I have had a few in recent weeks) are unable to go any deeper than repeating the "sound bites".
Mister unpopular here, there is no such thing as PPP, PFI yes, introduced by Tony Blair, Private Finance Initiative to build hospitals, only problem was they replaced the older hospitals with nice shiny new ones that had less beds and smaller operational areas, they were then leased back to the NHS at a nice high cost putting the NHS trusts under severe financial pressure for the next 25 years or so. The NHS no matter how much money is spent will always be ****ed because it's not about spending but about demand, people phone 999 because they want to get a lift home, people sit in A&E because they can't be arsed to pay for a box of plasters at Morrisons or buy paracetamol, yes the management are idiots as well, in Northumberland they have built a new hospital at Cramlington and centralised it as the only A&E facility for the county, I was there several times watching the queues of ambulances trying to get patients in as there was only one person on the admin desk, it doesn't work but the money that has been invested means they won't admit it. As for nukes we have come to a deal with the Americans, it's called Trident so ain't gonna save any money there.
Don't get me started on PFIs. Successive Labour Governments under Blair and Brown, went hell for leather on them, not giving two ****s about the services they privatised and the people working in them. Labour Councils readily took advantage of the money on offer. Even Thatcher didn't try to get away some of the stuff they did in the name of Labour. The Country is still paying the price and will be into the late 2020/2030s. Strangely enough, it was the Tory/Lib Dems Coalition Government, that put a stop to PFIs in the industry that I work in.
Politicians so very rarely answer the questions put to them so interviewers go after them. It's a vicious circle really as if they gave answers the same interviewers would nail them to the wall either there and then or at a later date when they would accuse them of going back on their word. It's bloody tedious to be honest.
That is true but it's also that you can get away with being rude on social media more easily. It's less personal and people can demonise others based on a tweet of 144 characters which barely touches their point of view.
